Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Dan O.]

Dan O. How certain of this are you?

That you choose to question my response and not question stilicho's remarks that I was responding to suggests that you are not actually following this thread. Therefore, there is no point in reading your remarks and I might as well put you on ignore.

 

[Fulcanelli]

That you choose to question my response and not question stilicho's remarks that I was responding to suggests that you are not actually following this thread. Therefore, there is no point in reading your remarks and I might as well put you on ignore.

Yes, why not. You ignore all the facts and the evidence, so you may as well ignore quadraginta too. Why go spoiling a perfectly bad record?

 

[Dan O.]

Yes, why not. You ignore all the facts and the evidence, so you may as well ignore quadraginta too. Why go spoiling a perfectly bad record?

What facts have I ignored?

 

[Alt+F4]

I just genuinely think they have a good chance during the appeal. Many people were suggesting even before the verdict that their best chance lay in the appeal courts, in fact.

In my opinion they will be convicted again upon appeal due to the fact that under Italian law (as I understand it) they must appeal together.

Might Amanda's fingering of Patrick Lumumba be due to a rough police interrogation? Maybe. Could the DNA evidence involving her at the apartment be explained by the fact that she lived there and her DNA is expected to be everywhere? Possibly. Was her behavior at the police station just the results of stress and nerves? Seems likely.

What can't be explained away is her lack of an alibi and Raffaele's lie regarding the big knife. His changing story doesn't help, neither is the fact that both their cell phones were off the night of the murder, an uncommon occurrence. In addition, only someone who knew Meredith would know she was using two cell phones, taking them both. As I mentioned before, Amanda's explaination regarding the mop is ridiculous.

I think that even if Amanda did not personally stab Meredith to death, she was there, an accessory and for that deserves the many years in prison I suspect she will serve.

 

[Fulcanelli]

What facts have I ignored?

Pretty much any fact that comes under the catagory of 'inconvenient'.

 

[Dan O.]

Pretty much any fact that comes under the catagory of 'inconvenient'.

What 'inconvenient' facts have I ignored?

 

[katy_did]

This bit ceases to amaze me.

Katy apparently still believes the FoA line about this being an Italian conspiracy against Knox and that due to American pressure, somehow the Appellate court will decide that the best course of action is to exonerate Knox and use Mignini as the fallguy for this.

What she, and those like her, fail to realize is that this is not, and has not been, a conspiracy against an American. There is no conspiracy involving the Prosecution, the Italian legal system, the forensics teams, etc.

I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring, actually, since miscarriages of justice happen in every country in the world. There are specific issues with the Italian system, certainly (just as there are issues with every legal system in the world). The unhealthy amount of influence awarded to the prosecutor is one such problem, at least when the prosecutor is as unscrupulous as Mignini. The amount of potentially prejudicial press coverage is another (something not allowed in the British and American systems, for instance).

The central point, as I suggested earlier, is that Knox and Sollecito's convictions are based on dubious forensic evidence, which will no doubt be explored further during the appeal. If anything, it's the public discrediting of this evidence that will have an impact, not some idea that there's an anti-American conspiracy.

Why are we even discussing the success or otherwise of the appeal(s)? I'm pretty confident in my opinion as to how they'll turn out, so I don't feel the need to convince anyone. The appeals will happen, one way or another. As I said before, I'm getting the impression some posters are quite worried that the appeal will be successful...

So, we have Amanda's bloody shoeprint in Filomena's room. No reasonable explanation has been offered for how it got there other than that Amanda herself left the mark.

This is interesting. Do you have a source for this? Here's something I'm trying to find out at the moment: a poster called Yummi claims that a footprint from Guede was found in Filomena's room. Here's what he writes on a post from Candace Dempsey's blog: "The picture with the 5 prints has never been produced in court. But the picture with Rudy's alleged print with a glass on it in Filomena's room was already know and produced by the prosecution (i think is codified as track146)." What's the story with this? I vaguely remember something similar in Micheli's report about a Nike print with glass on it, but as always the Google translation is a little confusing.

If you also have evidence that a 'bloody shoeprint' from Amanda was found in the room, I'd be very interested to see it.

The DNA evidence against Guede has not been challenged on the same lines as that against Sollecito and Knox. Not one person has claimed that Guede's DNA was mishandled, or contaminated. Not one. So while we're expected to accept that the forensics team was completely incompetent with Knox and Sollecito DNA, they were completely competent with Guede's.

Well, indeed. Transferral of someone's DNA to a bra clasp that's been kicking around the crime scene for 46 days and has three unidentified people's DNA on it is quite likely. Less likely that it would be inadvertently transferred inside the victim's vagina.

 

[quadraginta]

That you choose to question my response and not question stilicho's remarks that I was responding to suggests that you are not actually following this thread. Therefore, there is no point in reading your remarks and I might as well put you on ignore.

I can follow the thread just fine. The fact that your response to stilcho's comment about halides 1's case analogy was completely devoid of any content relating to either of those posts is not a result of any difficulties of mine.

Nor was your utterly gratuitous defamation of the Italian legal system.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring, actually, since miscarriages of justice happen in every country in the world. There are specific issues with the Italian system, certainly (just as there are issues with every legal system in the world). The unhealthy amount of influence awarded to the prosecutor is one such problem, at least when the prosecutor is as unscrupulous as Mignini. The amount of potentially prejudicial press coverage is another (something not allowed in the British and American systems, for instance).

You continue to refer to Mignini as a fall guy. That requires some kind of conspiracy - at the least, an agreement by the Judges that someone's head needs to roll to appease the Americans. Somehow, I doubt your ethno-centrism matters to those Judges.

And if by "unscrupulous" you mean "a prosecutor who illegally tapped the phones of a pair of writers he suspected of tampering with crime scenes" then, yes, Mignini is unscrupulous. Otherwise, you're simply continuing your (and the FoA) attempts to paint Mignini in a bad light. Regardless of American sentiment toward Mignini, the Judges will rule on the evidence provided. In this case, there are mountains of evidence against all 3 defendants.

The central point, as I suggested earlier, is that Knox and Sollecito's convictions are based on dubious forensic evidence, which will no doubt be explored further during the appeal. If anything, it's the public discrediting of this evidence that will have an impact, not some idea that there's an anti-American conspiracy.

No, it's not. The only evidence that is considered dubious by any of the Knox supporters is that which is inconvenient to Knox. None of the evidence has been thoroughly discredited. And the Judges are not likely to be convinced by public opinion.

Another example: we're expected to believe Knox if what she says exonerates her, but once we discuss anything that would be considered incriminating or contradictory, her statements were made under duress (including her emails, the voluntary "present", et al.).

This is interesting. Do you have a source for this? Here's something I'm trying to find out at the moment: a poster called Yummi claims that a footprint from Guede was found in Filomena's room. Here's what he writes on a post from Candace Dempsey's blog: "The picture with the 5 prints has never been produced in court. But the picture with Rudy's alleged print with a glass on it in Filomena's room was already know and produced by the prosecution (i think is codified as track146)." What's the story with this? I vaguely remember something similar in Micheli's report about a Nike print with glass on it, but as always the Google translation is a little confusing.

If you also have evidence that a 'bloody shoeprint' from Amanda was found in the room, I'd be very interested to see it.

. Knox’s blood and the blood of the victim were allegedly found comingled in multiple places around the crime scene, to include the bathroom, in one of the bedrooms and in the hallway...The same mixture of DNA was found in a bloody footprint in the hallway and in a roommate’s bedroom

Linky: http://clintvanzandt.newsvine.com/_news/2009/11/23/3533889-amanda-knox-guilty-or-innocent

Well, indeed. Transferral of someone's DNA to a bra clasp that's been kicking around the crime scene for 46 days and has three unidentified people's DNA on it is quite likely. Less likely that it would be inadvertently transferred inside the victim's vagina.

Except there was no source for contamination. The only other place Sollecito's DNA was found in the cottage was on a cigarette butt in the kitchen. Not on the door he tried to open, not in the room, nowhere that it could have transferred to the clasp while it lay covered both by Meredith's body and concurrently the clothing covering it before it was retrieved. This is exactly the same wall everyone else claiming contamination has come to and been unable to provide a reasonable scenario for contamination. Try again?

 

[Dan O.]

Except there was no source for contamination. The only other place Sollecito's DNA was found in the cottage was on a cigarette butt in the kitchen. Not on the door he tried to open, not in the room, nowhere that it could have transferred to the clasp while it lay covered both by Meredith's body and concurrently the clothing covering it before it was retrieved. This is exactly the same wall everyone else claiming contamination has come to and been unable to provide a reasonable scenario for contamination. Try again?

You must be of the opinion that contamination can only occur in the interval between when the crime is committed and when the evidence is collected. Do you have any documentation to support such an opinion or is it just a 'convenience' for you to ignore other possibilities.

 

[Fulcanelli]

I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring, actually, since miscarriages of justice happen in every country in the world. There are specific issues with the Italian system, certainly (just as there are issues with every legal system in the world). The unhealthy amount of influence awarded to the prosecutor is one such problem, at least when the prosecutor is as unscrupulous as Mignini. The amount of potentially prejudicial press coverage is another (something not allowed in the British and American systems, for instance).

Unscrupulous? I don't know how that smear can be justified.

The central point, as I suggested earlier, is that Knox and Sollecito's convictions are based on dubious forensic evidence, which will no doubt be explored further during the appeal. If anything, it's the public discrediting of this evidence that will have an impact, not some idea that there's an anti-American conspiracy.

Dubious only in 'your' eyes. You also seem to forget that they were not only convicted on the basis of the knife and bra clasp forensic evidence alone (although the big red herring offered constantly offered by the Knox truthers is that if only the knife and bra clasp goes away, then so does the whole case), there is also other forensic evidence... the footprints, mixed DNA, clear evidence of an assault by multiple attackers, clear evidence of a partial clean-up, clear evidence of a staging for example. There is also the non-forensic evidence, such as the lies, the false accusations, the phones, the computer, the behaviour and last but not least. the testimony of multiple witnesses who place Amanda and Raffaele at or near the cottage on the night of the murder and at other places at times they should not of have been with people they should not have been with.

a poster called Yummi claims that a footprint from Guede was found in Filomena's room.

Umm, NO he doesn't. And no print from Rudy Guede was found in Filomena's room. Yummi on that occasion was mistaken about the whereabouts of the print which was actually in Meredith's room and has never been established to be a bit of glass in the print. Meredith's blood was though, blood that had been cleaned and was also mixed with Amanda's DNA.

What's the story with this? I vaguely remember something similar in Micheli's report about a Nike print with glass on it, but as always the Google translation is a little confusing.

Post up the paragraph, both in English and in Italian. If need be, I'll get you a proper translation.

Well, indeed. Transferral of someone's DNA to a bra clasp that's been kicking around the crime scene for 46 days

It wasn't 'kicking around the crime scene' for 46 days. It was sealed in a locked room. Cut out the sophisty.

 

[Fulcanelli]

and has three unidentified people's DNA on it is quite likely.

It does not have the DNA of 3 unidentified people on it.

 

[Fulcanelli]

You must be of the opinion that contamination can only occur in the interval between when the crime is committed and when the evidence is collected. Do you have any documentation to support such an opinion or is it just a 'convenience' for you to ignore other possibilities.

Are you trying to claim the bra clasp was contaminated 'after' it was collected? Based on what evidence?

 

[Dan O.]

Are you trying to claim the bra clasp was contaminated 'after' it was collected? Based on what evidence?

Where did I say 'after'?

 

[quadraginta]

I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring, actually, since miscarriages of justice happen in every country in the world. There are specific issues with the Italian system, certainly (just as there are issues with every legal system in the world). The unhealthy amount of influence awarded to the prosecutor is one such problem, at least when the prosecutor is as unscrupulous as Mignini. The amount of potentially prejudicial press coverage is another (something not allowed in the British and American systems, for instance).
<snip>

You people keep saying stuff like this, and then pretend to not be bashing the Italians.

Lets look at what I've highlighted and discuss just one case example. Casey Anthony has been in jail in Florida, charged with the murder of her own daughter, since the summer of '08. Currently her trial is tentatively scheduled for May, 2011. Tentatively. The state has released over 12,000 pages of evidence accumulated against her, and it's still coming, and every scrap of that has been on national television on a nearly daily basis. The Grace creature's program aired virtually nothing else for over a year. Every night. Her family stopped visiting her in jail because every second of every visit was videotaped, released by the state, and the tapes played and criticized on the air. Her commissary purchases gets air time ... and ridicule.

I could go on for pages. And that's just one case. Do you really want to play this game?

Would you like to tryto play with prosecutorial discretion in the U.S. and its potential for misuse as a topic. Ask your buddy halides1 about Mike Nifong and the Duke lacrosse team. That one had a happy ending, sort of, but it was a near thing. I'm sure we can find plenty of other examples.

It's disingenuous for you to say "I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring" and then finish up the same paragraph with comments so completely without foundation and so pointedly and unambiguously prejudiced.

 

[Fulcanelli]

You people keep saying stuff like this, and then pretend to not be bashing the Italians.

Lets look at what I've highlighted and discuss just one case example. Casey Anthony has been in jail in Florida, charged with the murder of her own daughter, since the summer of '08. Currently her trial is tentatively scheduled for May, 2011. Tentatively. The state has released over 12,000 pages of evidence accumulated against her, and it's still coming, and every scrap of that has been on national television on a nearly daily basis. The Grace creature's program aired virtually nothing else for over a year. Every night. Her family stopped visiting her in jail because every second of every visit was videotaped, released by the state, and the tapes played and criticized on the air. Her commissary purchases gets air time ... and ridicule.

I could go on for pages. And that's just one case. Do you really want to play this game?

Would you like to try play with prosecutorial discretion in the U.S. and its potential for misuse as a topic. Ask your buddy halides1 about Mike Nifong and the Duke lacrosse team. That one had a happy ending, sort of, but it was a near thing. I'm sure we can find plenty of other examples.

It's disingenuous for you to say "I'm not sure why you're assuming I think it's any kind of 'conspiracy against an American'. I think that's a bit of a red herring" and then finish up the same paragraph with comments so completely without foundation and so pointedly and unambiguously prejudiced.

Yeah and of course, there's no such thing as the Sunshine Laws either

 

[piktor]

Micheli didn't hand down sentences to Knox and Sollecito, though. In their case, he was merely deciding whether or not there was enough evidence to send them trial. In many instances he's simply speculating as to what may have happened, in the same way as any of us might do on a forum. So quoting from his report as if it were factual is very misleading.

By the way, I'm still waiting for this 'credible theory' from the prosecution of which you speak.

The prosecution's theory about this crime is what it presented in court. The arguments for guilt, the police investigation, the coroner's report, the scientific report, the witness testimony for the prosecution. The resulting narrative is the theory of what happened.

I did not correct my comment and indicate the 'Sentenza' for Knox/Sollecito has not been handed down yet. It will be so in a few weeks. I apologize for the wrong implication that Micheli's Sentenza applies to Knox/Sollecito too. It does not.

The judges hearing the year-long Knox/Sollecito trial heard the very same investigation presented by the state against Guede. There is not a Guede investigation and a Knox/Sollecito investigation. It is the Meredith Kercher investigation, really.

The Knox/Sollecito judges heard the Kercher investigation and unanimously voted to convict.

We have not heard the reasons for conviction yet but they might sound like speculation but they are not speculative arguments. They are conclusions reached after the case was presented by the prosecution and by the defence.

We will hear in the Sentenza for Knox/Sollecito corroboration that it has been proven that the accused are indeed guilty of Meredith's homicide and that the 20-plus year prison sentence is well deserved and justified.

If circumstantial cases look like the justice system is handing down guilty verdicts butressed by flimsy police theories and no corroborating human witnesses, well, that's what justice systems do all over the world in circumstantial-case convictions.

A terrible crime was commited and the accused have not helped themselves at all. If anything, they have helped the prosecution.

Speculation and no hard facts you say. I say what the hell are the defence lawyers and expert witnesses for if not to enlighten us with the simple truth and destroy this abominable tissue of falsehoods spun by shoddy police work and speciously embroidered with suspect forensic science by a feckless prosecution full of thoughtless, gauzy theories.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

You must be of the opinion that contamination can only occur in the interval between when the crime is committed and when the evidence is collected. Do you have any documentation to support such an opinion or is it just a 'convenience' for you to ignore other possibilities.

Where did I say 'after'?

You're right. You didn't.

So the other three options would be:

A) it happened during the murder

or

B) it happened in the lab that uses bleach to clean everything. As Halides has pointed out, bleach destroys all traces of DNA and blood it comes into contact with. Irregardless of how thoroughly the cleaning is accomplished and we must be willing to believe that against all odds, the bra clasp was tested on the exact same day at the exact same time as the cigarette butt and/or the primary sample from Sollecito. Not a very plausible explanation - considering nothing else was contaminated by Sollecito's DNA, considering that the DNA matches one of the suspects and not one of the Techs, nor Officers, nor observers who would have had a much larger DNA signature in the lab (should we allow that the team was sloppy enough to allow contamination between tests).

or

C) it happened before the murder. Meaning we're expected to believe that Sollecito was playing with a bra belonging to the roommate of a girl he'd met 1 1/2 weeks prior. I don't know about you, but in my experience, most guys don't play with the bras of their gf's roommate(s). Not surprisingly, Sollecito hasn't even attempted to make this very simple claim. There wouldn't even really be any way to refute it. Yet, he doesn't make this claim. Nor does the Defense make the claim for him.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Where did I say 'after'?

It was a question. Perhaps you missed the 'question mark', those are normally regarded as clues.

So, 'when' do you mean then?* Or are you just going to continue to sling vague innuendos about and answer questions with questions?*


* Clue: There's a question mark on those.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

The prosecution's theory about this crime is what it presented in court. The arguments for guilt, the police investigation, the coroner's report, the scientific report, the witness testimony for the prosecution. The resulting narrative is the theory of what happened.

I did not correct my comment and indicate the 'Sentenza' for Knox/Sollecito has not been handed down yet. It will be so in a few weeks. I apologize for the wrong implication that Micheli's Sentenza applies to Knox/Sollecito too. It does not.

The judges hearing the year-long Knox/Sollecito trial heard the very same investigation presented by the state against Guede. There is not a Guede investigation and a Knox/Sollecito investigation. It is the Meredith Kercher investigation, really.

The Knox/Sollecito judges heard the Kercher investigation and unanimously voted to convict.

We have not heard the reasons for conviction yet but they might sound like speculation but they are not speculative arguments. They are conclusions reached after the case was presented by the prosecution and by the defence.

We will hear in the Sentenza for Knox/Sollecito corroboration that it has been proven that the accused are indeed guilty of Meredith's homicide and that the 20-plus year prison sentence is well deserved and justified.

If circumstantial cases look like the justice system is handing down guilty verdicts butressed by flimsy police theories and no corroborating human witnesses, well, that's what justice systems do all over the world in circumstantial-case convictions.

A terrible crime was commited and the accused have not helped themselves at all. If anything, they have helped the prosecution.

Speculation and no hard facts you say. I say what the hell are the defence lawyers and expert witnesses for if not to enlighten us with the simple truth and destroy this abominable tissue of falsehoods spun by shoddy police work and speciously embroidered with suspect forensic science by a feckless prosecution full of senseless, gauzy theories.

Well, that's hitting the nail on the head.

IF Amanda had nothing to hide, why lie? IF Sollecito is innocent, why the lies?

Lumumba didn't lie when he was called in for questioning. His alibi was verified and he was released. See, that's how it works. You're not guilty, you tell the truth, the truth is verified, and you're released.